QotNews Hacker News, Reddit, Lobsters, and Tildes articles rendered in reader mode.
Facebook Is Hosting Huge Numbers of Horrifying AI-Generated Videos of Violent Child Abuse, and Meta Is Barely Even Pretending to Care About Taking Them Down
That sentence it only exists because of addiction. Meta is the worst company on this planet because of apps like FB and Instagram, they grip into people’s lives and hold them hostage. I think they should’ve had a bigger penalty than $17 billion, needed to be a trillion.
Let's never forget that they were complicit in genocide in Myanmar. Facebook's wonton lack of moderation made it an ideal communication platform for propoganda and organization. They knowingly turned a blind eye.
Man, I still have an account and I'm not ready to delete it. I also have my dead mother's account.
My mother passed away last year. She was 81 and it's where all her friends were, because for many of them it was the first real social media they encountered. It's where I told all her friends she died, it was where I told them how they could watch her funeral online because so many of them couldn't travel for it. My personal account is the only way I have to contact some of my old friends.
I do think Meta is a garbage company, but at this point, I'd rather have it than nothing.
You can download an offline version and close both accounts. You get to keep and browse all of the memories without the garbage feed and providing them with data/revenue.
Look at your last sentence again and tell yourself that you're not addicted. Every one of those people have email addresses, so your statement is false. Also, you must be at least 50, maybe try and grow up.
> Look at your last sentence again and tell yourself that you're not addicted. Every one of those people have email addresses, so your statement is false
Ah yes the true or false test of reaching elderly people! Classic Test!
I think you lack some comprehension issues if you can't figure out why meeting someone where they are, is better than trying to reach someone where they are not.
Your advice was not helpful which was their point as you did not resolve how to reach all the older people in a timely, effective manner other than the one medium through which they use.
So you have a bunch of old people who use this common medium they are familiar with and your solution to avoid the medium while still contacting the whole of the old people is...?
It’s as if we’d had the chance to eradicate smoking before it became so deeply entrenched in society that nothing could displace it—and once again, we did nothing about it, even though we knew full well that it was nothing but harmful.
Facebook accounts dedicated to this horrific content have uploaded videos of babies and young children being slapped, kicked, bludgeoned with heavy objects, dragged by their hair, burned with stoves and irons, chained up and locked in cages and freezers, thrown down stairs, threatened with knives and guns, starved, made to eat dog food and garbage off the floor, and much more.
Some of the cruelties in the videos are astonishing in their specificity, seemingly generated at scale using repeated prompts. Some involve withholding an inhaler from a child who needs it, while others show allergic children forced to eat shellfish. Others show adults pouring snakes and cockroaches on weeping kids. Many more involve young Black children being whipped or beaten by white adults as they perform manual labor in what looks like a colonial African setting.
At first, we thought that we could map out the full network of accounts sharing the child abuse content. But after days of reviewing accounts and videos, we kept finding hundreds more. In effect, the supply seems to be endless, with the creators of the material uploading it as fast as we could identify it.
Contacted with questions and examples of the sickening videos, Meta offered a brief statement. “We have strict rules against content that depicts physical harm to children — whether it’s real or AI-generated — and we have removed these videos,” it read.
The company removed the majority of the videos we flagged to its press team, but left others online. The videos it opted not to remove included one depicting a young girl shut in a chest freezer, another showing a boy discarded in a trash can where he is seen gnawing on bones, and another of a girl in a classroom environment being forced to eat garbage. It also left online several other accounts we reported through regular Meta channels, including ones that shared videos of a toddler being struck in the face with a frying pan.
Yeah we're getting a Black Mirror episode or are in one now. Holy shit. The horrible things people do to simulated children are evidence enough that we shouldn't be allowed this kind of power.
> “We have strict rules against content that depicts physical harm to children — whether it’s real or AI-generated — and we have removed these videos,” it read.
Is this any different than any other case of moderation not working at scale?
> For that matter, Meta appears to have already deployed systems that can identify the stomach-turning videos, even if it’s declining to use them to moderate content on its platforms. We identified the vast majority of the horrid accounts simply by loading one of them, and then scrolling Facebook’s recommendation feature
The recommendation feature works just by commonality with what users tend to click (or at best title similarities) they don't do content detection/analysis.
It's a black box, we don't know if it's doing semantic analysis or not. I'd be amazed if it wasn't.
But even if it's just commonality, it's still a good triage tool. You start with one reported-bad video and feed anything near it in the recommendation engine to a more computationally intensive classifier, in distance order.
If it passes a certainty threshold, you bin it. If it doesn't, you queue it for a human to review. At each step you're using more computation but on a smaller pool of content, and you sort by priority, not by time. You may never empty your queue, but that doesn't matter. One report could potentially domino into thousands of takedowns.
Then you retrain your classifier on the removed content.
It is possible to do better than they are. They won't do better until they are forced to.
> It's a black box, we don't know if it's doing semantic analysis or not.
It might even be doing that from a transcription of the audio (even though it's very unlikely imo). But it's not really that telling you that a video is bad because a kid is eating from garbage.
> You start with one reported-bad video and feed anything near it in the recommendation engine to a more computationally intensive classifier, in distance order.
You don't really need a galaxy brain to monitor this, even just hiring more moderators would do.
But the problem is essentially that nobody gives a fuck. Xitter got and gets away with 100 times worse shit than what happens on meta platforms, so much so trump even bullies other countries when they start to investigate.
> They won't do better until they are forced to.
People VOTED for this shit, and now they reap the results of hat their dissonant dickheads did. It blows my mind that every news outlet isn't acknowledging a third of the country is cooked every single day.
They do, but it's not enough and they're paid a pittance.
And that job is - without exaggerating - traumatizing. Your whole day is looking at the worst possible shit imaginable. And I don't mean "dumb AI slop", I mean "actual graphic violence and CSAM".
Lot of truth there, but I don't think we've ever had a point where we realistically could have voted against Corporatocracy in the west. Not since 1980 anyway.
> But it's not really that telling you that a video is bad because a kid is eating from garbage.
That's an interesting one. It's repugnant but it's novel, so there's not exactly a training corpus out there. I don't know how you'd deal with that, in isolation, in an automated way.
(Ok, just thinking out loud. Break the problem down. First process creates a narration track for the video. Second process analyses the narration, not the original video. We're better at processing text than we are video right now, so reducing the problem to text might make it tractable).
> where we realistically could have voted against Corporatocracy in the west.
Literally any single damn election? It's not bloody russia.
> Not since 1980 anyway.
Dude, you seem onto some conspiracist shit. Like, even Reagan or Nixon are some kind of fine gentlemen in comparison to the crooks that MANY PEOPLE STILL SOMEHOW FUCKING SUPPORT.
> I don't know how you'd deal with that, in isolation, in an automated way.
The problem is that ragebait is promoted, and that there's absolutely no liability for fake and malicious accounts
You have to win an election first. That's not been a realistic option for a transformational left-wing party since Reagan (1980), Thatcher (1979), Kohl (1982), Hawke (1983). There was clearly an inflection point in Western politics circa 1980: the post-war consensus got torn up. In the UK, the Labour party had to reinvent itself as New Labour and do a deal with the devil (Blair is godfather to one of Murdoch's daughters) to regain power.
Which candidate in the 2024 US Presidential election was the one that was going to start dismantling Corporatocracy? Or was the best you could realistically hope for some more deckchair-rearranging within the current system and a lot of insider trading, like you got with Biden, Obama, Clinton?
If recognising that the Overton Window exists and has been tracking rightwards for 45 years to the point where actual fascists now have their hands on the levers of power in Washington is "conspiracist shit", then so be it. But I know that things that were achieved in the 1945-1980 period would be politically impossible if they had to be done today.
Meta, and X, and probably reddit before long, have all decided to sell the sword and stop selling the armor. moderation is effectively dead and gone, or exists only as a full blackbox that operates on a profit motive only, leading to profitable extremist content being abundant, and anti profit content being the only thing filtered out.
all the major social media will soon be a complete and total wasteland of artificial, botted, and highly manipulated content. before you say "shit it already is", its going to get MUCH worse. this article is just a glimpse, meta platforms are probably only a year ahead of reddit.
this spiral doesnt end without serious legislation reigning in AI tools and an executive branch putting some CEOs in handcuffs. and those dont happen without voters overwhelming our government with serious people willing to do what it takes to push our country out of this hell spiral.
I don't think moderation is gone o Reddit, it's just gotten ridiculous. If you have an opinion that doesn't go along with group think you're banned. It's nuts.
Subreddits suffer from the same thing that YouTube does which is that it's just a system for minting extremists. The posts and comments that strengthen whatever that particular bucket of people are there for get the upvotes and the attention. It's all about attention because it's all about ads. If ads went away, the internet could begin to heal itself.
This in some ways reminds me of the "monkey hate" fiasco from a while back. If you have the stomach to read about it, look it up. People were paying destitute Indonesians to torture/abuse and sometimes kill macaques, usually young ones. Wouldn't be surprised if it's some of the same people behind this.
As someone who worked huge online service platforms, I can guarantee that they absolutely have the ability and resource to do so, except their priorities are views clocks and revenues so policing is actually a conflict of interest to their bottomline.
I am. It's the groups. Facebook/Reddit killed the forum (eg phpbb), and for some narrow interests, when the mods are decent, Facebook's actually better.
Meta has zero support. They're barely even pretending to care because there's no one there to care. You need actual employees looking at things to pretend to care about them.
People act like meta is this monstrous organization seeing content and thinking "yep, this is exactly what we want here". They're not even looking! They don't give a shit! That's the issue!
And it's not just shit like this. I was getting doxxed to fucking shit on Facebook as a result of having the audacity to run a business during COVID. People were sharing my personal name. Personal email address. Phone number. I had to change my fucking phone number. None of the report systems worked. I couldn't do fuck all. I'd have had to go pay a lawyer to sue them and good luck collecting any kind of damages from basement dwelling neckbeards who own nothing. Reported them to the police. They said take it up with the website. Tried to take it up with the website. Zero ability to come into contact with anyone human.
They won't even take action when people are getting outright harassed and doxxed. What makes you think they'd give a shit about AI generated videos?
I'm sure it's more complex than this, but as you've described it it sounds like "person who wants to run a business but be uncontactable complains that facebook is running a business while being uncontactable".
Did you not see the part where I said PERSONAL email address and phone number? You know what that means right? Do you know what the word doxxing means?
Show me the part I say my business was uncontactable? I had email, in person, and phone support available. I had to get rid of phone support at one point unfortunately because I just couldn't handle the volume anymore. It was turning into that shit where you call a store and it just rings and rings and rings and that helps absolutely no one. So unfortunately had to get rid of the phone number but actual human based support was very much so still available.
I mean why even bother commenting if you're just going to be a dick?
What I wanted was for people to not be able to call my FAMILY harassing them for their preorder items and threatening them. That's what I wanted. But I guess hey just because I ran a business means I don't deserve that huh? No difference between personal and business huh? You run a business so people should be able to call your personal phone number and threaten your wife saying vile fucking shit because your toys aren't arriving on time huh?
Maybe don't make assumptions like that. Start there. For example you COULD have asked me to provide more info. Instead of doing that you made it seem like I was complaining about a business not wanting to be contactable while I myself also wanted to be uncontactable even though I was very clear in the reply that it was my PERSONAL information.
"as you've described it" and yet you COMPLETELY ignore the part where I stated it was my PERSONAL information being shared NOT the business information. Why the fuck would i have a problem with people sharing the business email and/or phone number on facebook?
It sounded like that to you because you either didn't read the entire thing before commenting, or you don't know what "personal" means.
foobarbizbaz | 18 hours ago
Facebook is such a cesspool that has so much more harmful content than good. The only reason it exists is because people are addicted to it.
digitalnomad_909 | 18 hours ago
That sentence it only exists because of addiction. Meta is the worst company on this planet because of apps like FB and Instagram, they grip into people’s lives and hold them hostage. I think they should’ve had a bigger penalty than $17 billion, needed to be a trillion.
Zelcron | 15 hours ago
Let's never forget that they were complicit in genocide in Myanmar. Facebook's wonton lack of moderation made it an ideal communication platform for propoganda and organization. They knowingly turned a blind eye.
redditonlygetsworse | 14 hours ago
> wonton
I am really not usually one to point out typos like this, but this particular /r/boneappletea is just too...delicious.
LifeGivesMeMelons | 15 hours ago
Man, I still have an account and I'm not ready to delete it. I also have my dead mother's account.
My mother passed away last year. She was 81 and it's where all her friends were, because for many of them it was the first real social media they encountered. It's where I told all her friends she died, it was where I told them how they could watch her funeral online because so many of them couldn't travel for it. My personal account is the only way I have to contact some of my old friends.
I do think Meta is a garbage company, but at this point, I'd rather have it than nothing.
RyanNewhart | 13 hours ago
You can download an offline version and close both accounts. You get to keep and browse all of the memories without the garbage feed and providing them with data/revenue.
LifeGivesMeMelons | 13 hours ago
Me; This is the only way I have to provide elderly people with information about my family.
You: Have you thought about not providing elderly people with information? Just download your memories of them!
You broken fuck.
RyanNewhart | 12 hours ago
Look at your last sentence again and tell yourself that you're not addicted. Every one of those people have email addresses, so your statement is false. Also, you must be at least 50, maybe try and grow up.
RadicalRaid | 5 hours ago
> so your statement is false
Dude. Have some empathy. You're being really weird.
DTFH_ | 5 hours ago
> Look at your last sentence again and tell yourself that you're not addicted. Every one of those people have email addresses, so your statement is false
Ah yes the true or false test of reaching elderly people! Classic Test!
I think you lack some comprehension issues if you can't figure out why meeting someone where they are, is better than trying to reach someone where they are not.
Your advice was not helpful which was their point as you did not resolve how to reach all the older people in a timely, effective manner other than the one medium through which they use.
So you have a bunch of old people who use this common medium they are familiar with and your solution to avoid the medium while still contacting the whole of the old people is...?
happy30thbirthday | 5 hours ago
It’s as if we’d had the chance to eradicate smoking before it became so deeply entrenched in society that nothing could displace it—and once again, we did nothing about it, even though we knew full well that it was nothing but harmful.
[OP] FuturismDotCom | 19 hours ago
Facebook accounts dedicated to this horrific content have uploaded videos of babies and young children being slapped, kicked, bludgeoned with heavy objects, dragged by their hair, burned with stoves and irons, chained up and locked in cages and freezers, thrown down stairs, threatened with knives and guns, starved, made to eat dog food and garbage off the floor, and much more.
Some of the cruelties in the videos are astonishing in their specificity, seemingly generated at scale using repeated prompts. Some involve withholding an inhaler from a child who needs it, while others show allergic children forced to eat shellfish. Others show adults pouring snakes and cockroaches on weeping kids. Many more involve young Black children being whipped or beaten by white adults as they perform manual labor in what looks like a colonial African setting.
At first, we thought that we could map out the full network of accounts sharing the child abuse content. But after days of reviewing accounts and videos, we kept finding hundreds more. In effect, the supply seems to be endless, with the creators of the material uploading it as fast as we could identify it.
Contacted with questions and examples of the sickening videos, Meta offered a brief statement. “We have strict rules against content that depicts physical harm to children — whether it’s real or AI-generated — and we have removed these videos,” it read.
The company removed the majority of the videos we flagged to its press team, but left others online. The videos it opted not to remove included one depicting a young girl shut in a chest freezer, another showing a boy discarded in a trash can where he is seen gnawing on bones, and another of a girl in a classroom environment being forced to eat garbage. It also left online several other accounts we reported through regular Meta channels, including ones that shared videos of a toddler being struck in the face with a frying pan.
DHFranklin | 9 hours ago
Yeah we're getting a Black Mirror episode or are in one now. Holy shit. The horrible things people do to simulated children are evidence enough that we shouldn't be allowed this kind of power.
Sharticus123 | 15 hours ago
The wrong apes evolved intelligence. Holy shit we’re such a fucked up species.
TroutMaskDuplica | 12 hours ago
> “Not all the links you sent violate our policies,” it read. “Can you please avoid suggesting in your reporting that they do?”
I don't think this communicates what meta thinks it does.
mirh | 18 hours ago
> “We have strict rules against content that depicts physical harm to children — whether it’s real or AI-generated — and we have removed these videos,” it read.
Is this any different than any other case of moderation not working at scale?
> For that matter, Meta appears to have already deployed systems that can identify the stomach-turning videos, even if it’s declining to use them to moderate content on its platforms. We identified the vast majority of the horrid accounts simply by loading one of them, and then scrolling Facebook’s recommendation feature
The recommendation feature works just by commonality with what users tend to click (or at best title similarities) they don't do content detection/analysis.
PersistentBadger | 17 hours ago
It's a black box, we don't know if it's doing semantic analysis or not. I'd be amazed if it wasn't.
But even if it's just commonality, it's still a good triage tool. You start with one reported-bad video and feed anything near it in the recommendation engine to a more computationally intensive classifier, in distance order.
If it passes a certainty threshold, you bin it. If it doesn't, you queue it for a human to review. At each step you're using more computation but on a smaller pool of content, and you sort by priority, not by time. You may never empty your queue, but that doesn't matter. One report could potentially domino into thousands of takedowns.
Then you retrain your classifier on the removed content.
It is possible to do better than they are. They won't do better until they are forced to.
mirh | 16 hours ago
> It's a black box, we don't know if it's doing semantic analysis or not.
It might even be doing that from a transcription of the audio (even though it's very unlikely imo). But it's not really that telling you that a video is bad because a kid is eating from garbage.
> You start with one reported-bad video and feed anything near it in the recommendation engine to a more computationally intensive classifier, in distance order.
You don't really need a galaxy brain to monitor this, even just hiring more moderators would do.
But the problem is essentially that nobody gives a fuck. Xitter got and gets away with 100 times worse shit than what happens on meta platforms, so much so trump even bullies other countries when they start to investigate.
> They won't do better until they are forced to.
People VOTED for this shit, and now they reap the results of hat their dissonant dickheads did. It blows my mind that every news outlet isn't acknowledging a third of the country is cooked every single day.
redditonlygetsworse | 13 hours ago
> even just hiring more moderators would do.
They do, but it's not enough and they're paid a pittance.
And that job is - without exaggerating - traumatizing. Your whole day is looking at the worst possible shit imaginable. And I don't mean "dumb AI slop", I mean "actual graphic violence and CSAM".
mirh | 13 hours ago
It's not enough because they are just doing the bare minimum where (as noted) it takes a week for claims to be reviewed.
PersistentBadger | 14 hours ago
Lot of truth there, but I don't think we've ever had a point where we realistically could have voted against Corporatocracy in the west. Not since 1980 anyway.
> But it's not really that telling you that a video is bad because a kid is eating from garbage.
That's an interesting one. It's repugnant but it's novel, so there's not exactly a training corpus out there. I don't know how you'd deal with that, in isolation, in an automated way.
(Ok, just thinking out loud. Break the problem down. First process creates a narration track for the video. Second process analyses the narration, not the original video. We're better at processing text than we are video right now, so reducing the problem to text might make it tractable).
mirh | 13 hours ago
> where we realistically could have voted against Corporatocracy in the west.
Literally any single damn election? It's not bloody russia.
> Not since 1980 anyway.
Dude, you seem onto some conspiracist shit. Like, even Reagan or Nixon are some kind of fine gentlemen in comparison to the crooks that MANY PEOPLE STILL SOMEHOW FUCKING SUPPORT.
> I don't know how you'd deal with that, in isolation, in an automated way.
The problem is that ragebait is promoted, and that there's absolutely no liability for fake and malicious accounts
PersistentBadger | 2 hours ago
You have to win an election first. That's not been a realistic option for a transformational left-wing party since Reagan (1980), Thatcher (1979), Kohl (1982), Hawke (1983). There was clearly an inflection point in Western politics circa 1980: the post-war consensus got torn up. In the UK, the Labour party had to reinvent itself as New Labour and do a deal with the devil (Blair is godfather to one of Murdoch's daughters) to regain power.
Which candidate in the 2024 US Presidential election was the one that was going to start dismantling Corporatocracy? Or was the best you could realistically hope for some more deckchair-rearranging within the current system and a lot of insider trading, like you got with Biden, Obama, Clinton?
If recognising that the Overton Window exists and has been tracking rightwards for 45 years to the point where actual fascists now have their hands on the levers of power in Washington is "conspiracist shit", then so be it. But I know that things that were achieved in the 1945-1980 period would be politically impossible if they had to be done today.
NinjaLion | 17 hours ago
Meta, and X, and probably reddit before long, have all decided to sell the sword and stop selling the armor. moderation is effectively dead and gone, or exists only as a full blackbox that operates on a profit motive only, leading to profitable extremist content being abundant, and anti profit content being the only thing filtered out.
all the major social media will soon be a complete and total wasteland of artificial, botted, and highly manipulated content. before you say "shit it already is", its going to get MUCH worse. this article is just a glimpse, meta platforms are probably only a year ahead of reddit.
this spiral doesnt end without serious legislation reigning in AI tools and an executive branch putting some CEOs in handcuffs. and those dont happen without voters overwhelming our government with serious people willing to do what it takes to push our country out of this hell spiral.
YouMustBeJoking888 | 16 hours ago
I don't think moderation is gone o Reddit, it's just gotten ridiculous. If you have an opinion that doesn't go along with group think you're banned. It's nuts.
stuffitystuff | 16 hours ago
Subreddits suffer from the same thing that YouTube does which is that it's just a system for minting extremists. The posts and comments that strengthen whatever that particular bucket of people are there for get the upvotes and the attention. It's all about attention because it's all about ads. If ads went away, the internet could begin to heal itself.
petitecrivain | 18 hours ago
This in some ways reminds me of the "monkey hate" fiasco from a while back. If you have the stomach to read about it, look it up. People were paying destitute Indonesians to torture/abuse and sometimes kill macaques, usually young ones. Wouldn't be surprised if it's some of the same people behind this.
WiseOrder4436 | 16 hours ago
I don't understand what on earth the motivation would be to post something like this in the first place?
PersistentBadger | 14 hours ago
Somebody's watching it. So the motivation is cash.
(Who the fuck is watching it?)
SunMoonTruth | 13 hours ago
Where are all the pearl clutching biddies when you need them to be actually useful? Nowhere? Typical. Completely useless.
Budget_Hamster4422 | 18 hours ago
meta only cares about $
they have no intention to do anything because they don't give a...
taisui | 15 hours ago
As someone who worked huge online service platforms, I can guarantee that they absolutely have the ability and resource to do so, except their priorities are views clocks and revenues so policing is actually a conflict of interest to their bottomline.
YouMustBeJoking888 | 16 hours ago
Why is anyone on FB these days? It jumped the shark more than a decade ago.
PersistentBadger | 14 hours ago
I am. It's the groups. Facebook/Reddit killed the forum (eg phpbb), and for some narrow interests, when the mods are decent, Facebook's actually better.
Scared_Guide_8787 | 16 hours ago
I’ve reported literal Nazi propaganda on Facebook. With the “k” word. Nothing was done.
unethicalpigeon | 16 hours ago
Meta has zero support. They're barely even pretending to care because there's no one there to care. You need actual employees looking at things to pretend to care about them.
People act like meta is this monstrous organization seeing content and thinking "yep, this is exactly what we want here". They're not even looking! They don't give a shit! That's the issue!
And it's not just shit like this. I was getting doxxed to fucking shit on Facebook as a result of having the audacity to run a business during COVID. People were sharing my personal name. Personal email address. Phone number. I had to change my fucking phone number. None of the report systems worked. I couldn't do fuck all. I'd have had to go pay a lawyer to sue them and good luck collecting any kind of damages from basement dwelling neckbeards who own nothing. Reported them to the police. They said take it up with the website. Tried to take it up with the website. Zero ability to come into contact with anyone human.
They won't even take action when people are getting outright harassed and doxxed. What makes you think they'd give a shit about AI generated videos?
PersistentBadger | 14 hours ago
I'm sure it's more complex than this, but as you've described it it sounds like "person who wants to run a business but be uncontactable complains that facebook is running a business while being uncontactable".
unethicalpigeon | 13 hours ago
Did you not see the part where I said PERSONAL email address and phone number? You know what that means right? Do you know what the word doxxing means?
Show me the part I say my business was uncontactable? I had email, in person, and phone support available. I had to get rid of phone support at one point unfortunately because I just couldn't handle the volume anymore. It was turning into that shit where you call a store and it just rings and rings and rings and that helps absolutely no one. So unfortunately had to get rid of the phone number but actual human based support was very much so still available.
I mean why even bother commenting if you're just going to be a dick?
What I wanted was for people to not be able to call my FAMILY harassing them for their preorder items and threatening them. That's what I wanted. But I guess hey just because I ran a business means I don't deserve that huh? No difference between personal and business huh? You run a business so people should be able to call your personal phone number and threaten your wife saying vile fucking shit because your toys aren't arriving on time huh?
PersistentBadger | 11 hours ago
> I'm sure it's more complex than this
> but as you've described it
> it sounds like
I don't know how to be any more conciliatory. Sorry.
unethicalpigeon | 10 hours ago
Maybe don't make assumptions like that. Start there. For example you COULD have asked me to provide more info. Instead of doing that you made it seem like I was complaining about a business not wanting to be contactable while I myself also wanted to be uncontactable even though I was very clear in the reply that it was my PERSONAL information.
"as you've described it" and yet you COMPLETELY ignore the part where I stated it was my PERSONAL information being shared NOT the business information. Why the fuck would i have a problem with people sharing the business email and/or phone number on facebook?
It sounded like that to you because you either didn't read the entire thing before commenting, or you don't know what "personal" means.
PersistentBadger | 9 hours ago
> Why the fuck would i have a problem with people sharing the business email and/or phone number on facebook?
Why indeed.
Are you American? Two nations divided by a common language. It would explain a few things.